Questions from "green" players

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Questions from "green" players

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's Eagle Day to Bombing the Reich >> The War Room >> Questions from "green" players

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Questions from "green" players - 11/18/2009 4:13:52 PM

Frasse

Posts: 7
Joined: 11/16/2009
Status: offline

I'm starting this thread to post my questions about the game. I'm completely new to this game, meaning that I didn't play the older versions. I hope some veteran player will take pity and answer my questions. I hope that other inexperienced players will post their questions here.

My two first questions are the following

1. How do I stop fighters from strafing. I send Spitfires (and other fighters also) on FS to clear the path, and to protect the rear on the way home for my bombing missions. But sometimes the spitfires insists on strafing different locations, and everybody agrees that a paper plane has a greater chance of surviving AA fire than a Spitfire. I end up with a lot of destroyed and damaged spitfires when they where supposed to hunt for LW in the sky. How do I avoid this?

2. The weapon database gives values for the airplanes. But I wonder about the different capacities for the planes at different heights. Example is the Mustang I and the P-47. I read in wikipedia (I know I should be a fanatic and by a book collection with all the airplanes from WWII), that the Mustang I had a very low performance above 15000 ft (due to the engine used), and that the P-47 could perform very well at 36000 ft (thanks to turbo charge). Are these effects included in the game, should I take this in consideration?

Best regards

Post #: 1

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/18/2009 4:52:54 PM

Oliver Heindorf

Posts: 1911
Joined: 5/1/2002
From: Hamburg/Deutschland
Status: offline

1. no, you cant. if there is something in their way and they like to strafe, they do it. no way to stop this - select a way without tragets will help.

2. the game has different altitude bands included and the aircraft stats vary between them on the historical way. so, yes, it should be considered by you.

_____________________________

(in reply to Frasse)

Post #: 2

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/18/2009 5:53:30 PM

Golden Bear

Posts: 190
Joined: 3/27/2006
Status: offline

Some things to try are... zig zag your interceptors to use up all their fuel on the way to the target point. It doesn't stop it but I seem to have better luck with them just heading home. Try to keep their path away from AFs although they will go pretty far off to look for a chance to commit seppuku. Use the hover point or whatever it is called and they may only attack the closest AF before going home. And, yes, this can be annoying becausee I like to send sweeps up the path of withdrawal for a bomber raid since the escorts don't cover as well during retreat and there are all kinds of riff raff bad guy fighters out there without fuel. Remember that historically a LOT of fighters were lost attacking AFs... if it makes you feel any better to be somewhat "historical."

The altitude bands are supposed to be in there but don't count on them. For instance the P38s until they stopped using them had issues at higher altitudes, even the ones that were "fixed." (It's in Freeman's book) So they tended to use them at lower altitude. However, when I do this they get their pants shot off, sometimes to the point where I would lose more of them than bombers. At least they protected the bombers by tiring out the LW. My best use has been high cover of at least 4000' but even still they get hammered after bouncing.

Carl

(in reply to Oliver Heindorf)

Post #: 3

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/18/2009 9:36:09 PM

Frasse

Posts: 7
Joined: 11/16/2009
Status: offline

Thanks for the answers. Just out of curiosity at what height where the missions carried out historical?

Frasse

(in reply to Golden Bear)

Post #: 4

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/19/2009 9:12:26 PM

Tuk

Posts: 117
Joined: 10/20/2009
Status: offline

Here's another greenie question. I have most of my single engine fighters set to 'bounce-fighter' yet at every opportunity they go for bombers, leaving the escorts untouched and making a nice target of themselves. The following twin engine and gun pod armed single engine fighters set to 'bounce bomber' end up fighting with escorts and not the bombers. Not every time, but enough to peev. If this replicates historical behaviour, I'm all for it, if not, is there a way to avoid it?

(in reply to Frasse)

Post #: 5

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/20/2009 6:22:59 PM

Nicholas Bell

Posts: 549
Joined: 4/10/2006
From: Eagle River, Alaska
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frasse
Thanks for the answers. Just out of curiosity at what height where the missions carried out historical

Heavy bombers "usually" bombed in the 24-28,000 range. But there were a lot of exceptions which the altitude was lower. The raids on August 17th 1943 went in at 17,000 feet. Generally as the war progressed and the FlaK got heavier, the bombers flew in the higher range. I suppose the reduced accuracy was made up for by the large numbers of bombers. Plus most bombing in late 1944 and 45 was done through the clouds using H2S, which means there was not much accuracy to begin with.

(in reply to Frasse)

Post #: 6

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/20/2009 6:28:31 PM

Nicholas Bell

Posts: 549
Joined: 4/10/2006
From: Eagle River, Alaska
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tuk

Here's another greenie question. I have most of my single engine fighters set to 'bounce-fighter' yet at every opportunity they go for bombers, leaving the escorts untouched and making a nice target of themselves. The following twin engine and gun pod armed single engine fighters set to 'bounce bomber'�end up fighting with�escorts and not the bombers. Not every time, but� enough to peev. If this�replicates historical behaviour, I'm all for it, if not, is there a way to avoid it?

You are not alone in observing this. It almost seems like it's backwards in the program, doesn't it? I've taken to individually placing interceptors (especially the 110s and 410s which seem to stick to fighter escorts like glue)on patrol using the List function and reassigning them to attack bomber formations. But it seems that once attacked by escorts, they automatically change their target to the escort instead of continuing onward to the bomber formation. This is a very tedious process since you have to figure out the raid number of the escort first, but it does help.

(in reply to Tuk)

Post #: 7

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/21/2009 12:49:27 AM

Frasse

Posts: 7
Joined: 11/16/2009
Status: offline

I have three new questions regarding bombing ground troops.

1. Is it recommended to start bombing ground troops before the "operations" (like bombing ground trps in north France in may 44) start?
2. What is recommended to focus on bombing the rail (supply) system or bombing the ground troops?
3. I only use medium and light bombers against ground trps. Is it recommended to use the heavy bombers on grnd trps?

Frasse

(in reply to Nicholas Bell)

Post #: 8

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/21/2009 5:18:23 AM

Golden Bear

Posts: 190
Joined: 3/27/2006
Status: offline

You can totally ignore any bombing of ground troops and it won't materially affect your campaign. A few people - well, Sarge, basically - have made enormous efforts to affect the ground campaign by bombing troops and noticed fairly minor differences.

If you are a newb/Green player, just ignore them. Their only real use is as targets for running missions to get morale back up for shattered BGs.

If you don't know what to bomb and want something close... hit the radars, hit the RR yards. Both are useful.

(in reply to Frasse)

Post #: 9

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/21/2009 3:04:46 PM

Nicholas Bell

Posts: 549
Joined: 4/10/2006
From: Eagle River, Alaska
Status: offline

Agree with Golden Bear. My testing shows that the ground war pretty much happens according to the historical schedule no matter if you bomb the heck out of them or ignore them entirely. So the only time I would bomb them is when forced to by political requirements, although as Golden Bear points out, there are more worthwhile targets to hit when you are forced to which will help your overall campaign. His point about making use of them to bring up morale is an interesting one which frankly never entered my mind. Neat idea.

One thing to note, when you do get forced to use bomb the political targets, consider using the maximum force possible to inflict enough damage to satisfy the requirements as quickly as possible - so you can get back to bombing what *you* want to.

When the 8th AF gets restricted by Overlord requirements, the AI uses a minimal amount of heavy bombers, if it participates at all. This only makes the Overload requirements stay in effect longer because only the tactical airforces are hitting them. In tests, often the only way the AI gets out of Overlord requirements is when the ground forces advance and occupy France, which means the Combined Bomber Offensive is basically on hold for months, letting the Germans recover. You don't want to follow that example.

(in reply to Frasse)

Post #: 10

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/22/2009 3:45:06 PM

TechSgt

Posts: 306
Joined: 9/19/2008
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frasse

I have three new questions regarding bombing ground troops.

1. Is it recommended to start bombing ground troops before the "operations" (like bombing ground trps in north France in may 44) start?
2. What is recommended to focus on bombing the rail (supply) system or bombing the ground troops?
3. I only use medium and light bombers against ground trps. Is it recommended to use the heavy bombers on grnd trps?

Frasse

With respect to Bear and Nick,

I do think that bombing ground units to be effective. The Landing Dates will not change substantially, but the Breakout phase can be changed.

1) Damage to ground troops will slow down their approach to the fortified lines. Also, it will lower their strength if/when they get there.
2) You have to bomb both, to be effective.
3) This is the 64,000 dollar question.

TS

(in reply to Frasse)

Post #: 11

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/22/2009 9:47:27 PM

artuitus_slith

Posts: 141
Joined: 11/22/2009
Status: offline

Im having trouble with the 'shuttle' option in the game. I shutled my a36s and spitfire escorts to the front lines in italy, yet when i try to plot a mission they have to come out of Sicily. Is there a fix to this or what am i doing wrong? I cant even use my a36s anymore since all targets are out of range for them from sicily

(in reply to TechSgt)

Post #: 12

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/23/2009 7:23:26 AM

TechSgt

Posts: 306
Joined: 9/19/2008
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: gmoney

Im having trouble with the 'shuttle' option in the game. I shutled my a36s and spitfire escorts to the front lines in italy, yet when i try to plot a mission they have to come out of Sicily. Is there a fix to this or what am i doing wrong? I cant even use my a36s anymore since all targets are out of range for them from sicily

I'm not certain I completely understand your problem...

Just as a test, find the airfield with det-81th Group or det-27th Group.
Select a nearby target, then put the Inbound #1 waypoint very close to the airfield with the A-36's detachment. Then Pick Lead Unit. The A-36 unit should appear near the top of the list. If so, then the problem is selecting a target too far away from the detachment's airfield or to close to another friendly airfield and you will have to move the Inbound waypoint everytime.

Be very careful with shuttling detachments, or you will end up with detachments of detachments. This caused problems in the old game.
Only shuttle a detachment back to the same airfield as the cadre unit. Getting the escort detachments back will present a problem.

Don't panic there are work arounds!

(in reply to artuitus_slith)

Post #: 13

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/23/2009 4:02:01 PM

Golden Bear

Posts: 190
Joined: 3/27/2006
Status: offline

Do you perhaps want to Move the units rather than Shuttle?

Personally I avoid Shuttles because of some bad experiences and they don't seem all that necessary. Still nice to have the option for occasional use.

(in reply to TechSgt)

Post #: 14

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/23/2009 7:43:14 PM

artuitus_slith

Posts: 141
Joined: 11/22/2009
Status: offline

i used the shutle option which doesnt seem to 'activate' the af. However after several turns the fields started to activate themselves and i can use them efficeintly now.

My big question now is how many AC lost can the Germans sustain in '43 before i can really start hammering thier production with b17s with fighter cover? I have 728 losses VS 618 kills in less than a month; How many kills/month do i need to start putting a dent in the lufftwaffe? roughly half my losses are bomber/fighter bombers with the most of the rest being fighters (mostly outclassed types like p39s, p40s and mustang 1s). proably 80-85% of the german losses are fw's and 109s, with the rest being night fighters and Italian ac with a few me 110/410s thrown in for good measure

< Message edited by gmoney -- 11/23/2009 7:46:41 PM >

(in reply to Frasse)

Post #: 15

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/24/2009 8:38:11 AM

TechSgt

Posts: 306
Joined: 9/19/2008
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: gmoney

i used the shutle option which doesnt seem to 'activate' the af. However after several turns the fields started to activate themselves and i can use them efficeintly now.

I think I understand now...
The grey airfields are "new" Allied airfields. They will become usable about 7 days after they first appear -- and will change to a white display. They also will be assigned to a specific command. You can "move" units to new airfields in the same commands, Med AF to Med AF, etc. You can shuttle units to any Allied airfield within range. You can not speed the activation process up.

My big question now is how many AC lost can the Germans sustain in '43 before i can really start hammering thier production with b17s with fighter cover? I have 728 losses VS 618 kills in less than a month; How many kills/month do i need to start putting a dent in the lufftwaffe? roughly half my losses are bomber/fighter bombers with the most of the rest being fighters (mostly outclassed types like p39s, p40s and mustang 1s). proably 80-85% of the german losses are fw's and 109s, with the rest being night fighters and Italian ac with a few me 110/410s thrown in for good measure.

I'm assuming you are playing the '43 long campaign.
The game will play along the historical lines. The daylight campaign does not really kick into high until long-range fighters arrive. Starting around Dec '43. But, you have to build up a quantity of them. So figure, Feb '44. Bomber Command is your most effective air force in the beginning. Use the openning months to learn operational tactics, so you are ready for escorted heavy deep raids.

If you want to jump right in, I suggest playing the "Big Week" or "Oil Campaigns"
If you really want to jump right in with both wings, play the '44 campaign. Be warned, the learning curve is straight up.

Have fun!

(in reply to artuitus_slith)

Post #: 16

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/24/2009 11:57:06 AM

Frasse

Posts: 7
Joined: 11/16/2009
Status: offline

Thanks for all the answers.

A new question, when is it recommended to update the airplane models in regards to the available amount of the newer models?

Frasse

(in reply to TechSgt)

Post #: 17

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/24/2009 3:46:41 PM

artuitus_slith

Posts: 141
Joined: 11/22/2009
Status: offline

Thanks for all the help.� My question about the '43 long campaign was how many german AC do i have to destroy in the air to increase my overall AS? i have total AS over italy and pretty good AS over north central and NW france, NE france a Nw germany are still up for grabs.� I understand that the 43 campaign is more about building up your forces and increasing thier exp, i dont do any bombing runs during the day against targets outside escort range.� I hit all of the high value stratigic targets in Norther france and hit any af i see that has AC at it, so long as my escorts can make it there and back.� I also hit alot of the radar stations in Northern france, now im out of 'milk run' targets and am switching to AFs.� I m trying to weaken the german af in 43 waiting on my long range escorts to arrive to really start hammering german industry, so i wanted to know how many german ac i need to destroy each month to begin weakening the german af.� my score for 28 turns sits at 849 german ac destroyed vs 921 ac lost-id imagine i need to get my k/d ratio up significanty to put a dent in german production, just want to know what kind of numbers i need.

one more question then ill leave you guys alone for a bit-I use bc in two phases-my lancs and halifax's attack enemy area targets from high alt while my halifaxes and my stirlings attack enemy industrial targets at 9000ft. the raids on industry are hit or miss-sometimes i clobber the enemy factory sometimes i dont even hurt it and have to send a follow up raid a few days later. My mossie fb i use a 8100 feet against enemy Af's with some success, occasionally ill send the mossies to berline at max alt to draw nf away from my primary groups. Is this a good tactic for BC or am I really screwing up BC using them this way? i just dont like having AC doing nothing (stirlings and wellingtons) but im not willing to send them to slaughter against heavily defended area targets either.

< Message edited by gmoney -- 11/24/2009 3:57:24 PM >

(in reply to Frasse)

Post #: 18

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/24/2009 6:14:54 PM

Golden Bear

Posts: 190
Joined: 3/27/2006
Status: offline

You can't shoot down enough LW fighters in '43 to make it safe to run raids without escort - that is the short answer.

If you want to run escort-less then you need to try to pull fighters away with decoy raids or something. You should learn to do that anyway. You'll find however that there are usually a few fighters always left to attack you.

Having played numerous '43 campaigns up into '44 I've gotten tired of that part of the game and enjoy more the '44 campaigns. In my current effort I've played from Feb. 20th to May 3rd and destroyed over 6500 Axis interceptors (night included)... they still have plenty more. Even at the very end of the game they still have more than enough fighters to cut apart unescorted raids.

'43 is a tough campaign because you get easily bored with staying withing "safe" bounds of escorts and it takes seemingly forever for better planes to show up. If you can take the attitude that bombing missions are only their to draw the LW up where you can shoot them down - and to show you their AFs so you can strafe them next turn - you are on the best track. Your goal should be to try to get LW losses above the Dingo Line: 50 fighters a day on the average.

Also, you'll find out as you near December that there are a frustrating number of days where the weather is just abysmal. Trying to run raids can lead to bombers heading off while FGs scrub.

Carl

(in reply to artuitus_slith)

Post #: 19

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/24/2009 6:35:34 PM

artuitus_slith

Posts: 141
Joined: 11/22/2009
Status: offline

yeah i figured 43 was going to be a little boring but i was fine with that. I didnt think i could dent the German af enough to get by with unescorted raids just thought i might be able to reduce thier effectiveness come the spring of 44 mission. Dec will be alot of low level recon and single sqd fighter sweeps to af i guess with a heavy dose of 'decoy' missions from my rcm craft with lots of night fighters. Ill prolly run alot of fb missions against rail/troops in preparation for overlord-cant hurt to get a head start on my mandatory targets and i dont use the FB for much else anyways. well have a while to get to that point anyways so for now i need to get another 700 kills per month to start affecting the german af so got alot of work to do.

1 thing that annoys the hell out of me with this game is the 'TOT' estimate which is never anything close to accurate with the b17s. it tells me it takes 49 min to get to an af in northern germany when it takes an hour to reach the coast of france-not sure if anyone else has had this bug but it is anoying forcing me to do MATH in a computer game

(in reply to Golden Bear)

Post #: 20

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/24/2009 6:47:55 PM

mikkey

Posts: 3142
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Slovakia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Golden Bear
...Your goal should be to try to get LW losses above the Dingo Line: 50 fighters a day on the average...

Carl, where is Dingo Line?

_____________________________

(in reply to Golden Bear)

Post #: 21

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/25/2009 5:58:38 AM

TechSgt

Posts: 306
Joined: 9/19/2008
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: gmoney

...

1 thing that annoys the hell out of me with this game is the 'TOT' estimate which is never anything close to accurate with the b17s. it tells me it takes 49 min to get to an af in northern germany when it takes an hour to reach the coast of france-not sure if anyone else has had this bug but it is anoying forcing me to do MATH in a computer game

This is how the game is designed, it's in the manual. If you check "Review Missions" it will give you a more accurate time-on-target, (TOT). It is one of those funny items in BtR; just like the Action Report will overstate enemy aircraft shot down, but the Campaign Summary will be correct.

TS

(in reply to artuitus_slith)

Post #: 22

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/25/2009 4:06:53 PM

Golden Bear

Posts: 190
Joined: 3/27/2006
Status: offline

Years ago Harley calculated that the Allied player needs to average 50+ LW planes destroyed a turn in order to stay ahead of the huge Axis build program that kicks in as the game goes along. Dingo Line = 50 kill/turn.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mikkey

quote:

ORIGINAL: Golden Bear
...Your goal should be to try to get LW losses above the Dingo Line: 50 fighters a day on the average...

Carl, where is Dingo Line?

(in reply to mikkey)

Post #: 23

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/25/2009 5:08:22 PM

mikkey

Posts: 3142
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Slovakia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Golden Bear
Years ago Harley calculated that the Allied player needs to average 50+ LW planes destroyed a turn in order to stay ahead of the huge Axis build program that kicks in as the game goes along. Dingo Line = 50 kill/turn.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mikkey

quote:

ORIGINAL: Golden Bear
...Your goal should be to try to get LW losses above the Dingo Line: 50 fighters a day on the average...

Carl, where is Dingo Line?

thanks for explanation. I thought that it's something as Gustav Line in Italy

_____________________________

(in reply to Golden Bear)

Post #: 24

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/25/2009 5:54:48 PM

artuitus_slith

Posts: 141
Joined: 11/22/2009
Status: offline

ok gonna have to do that then i hate math. Finally reached the century mark in kills yesterday- 121 kills vs 78 losses. about 40 of those kills were on the ground so my fighter boys need to step up thier game-my b17s got killed (38 losses) so it is time for heads to roll-the b17s were heavily escorted but apperently my ground crews thought it would be funny to load up my fighters with rubber bullets and paintballs since all they seemed to do was damage enemy ac

(in reply to TechSgt)

Post #: 25

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/25/2009 9:11:07 PM

Golden Bear

Posts: 190
Joined: 3/27/2006
Status: offline

121 for 78 is pretty good. Keep the idea in mind that the bombers are there to draw up the bad guys for you to shoot down. Early in the game - I mean like from the first turn - write down the AFs they launch from and sweep them the next turn. Some JGs will move but some will be there for you to get to. Try to time it so you have planes hovering as they return to the AF so that you can get them landing. Catching them on the ground as they are preparing to take off and between launches is REALLY good for destroying planes on the ground. DOn't know what it does to pilots though. Early in the game is important because most of the LW AFs are very light on AA at this point but will accumulate it rapidly. Don't forget that you can "bait and switch" to use the Fighter Command and Tactical AFs fighters to escort. You NEED this early in '43 and it is historically sound.

In terms of raising your kill ratio, try running bombing missions with only 2 BGs and heavy escort. Fewer targets can help lower losses. At start of game most targets are relatively undamaged so that even a 2BG raid can give you decent points. You want to run raids every turn that weather allows you. It tires out the JGs and ZGs while you rotate your own fighter escorts to keep them fresh.

...and as the man said, the correct-ish TOT is in the Review Missions screen (Ctrl-R). If you are timing a FS to cross with a bombing mission, plot them both then go to RMs and tweak them until the timing is what you want.

(in reply to artuitus_slith)

Post #: 26

RE: Questions from "green" players - 11/26/2009 3:05:14 AM

artuitus_slith

Posts: 141
Joined: 11/22/2009
Status: offline

well im 30 turns in and doing ok so i guess i missed my 'easy' kills. i do know that you can kill/wound pilots on the ground since one day i only destroyed ac on the ground and still killed/wounded enemy pilots. initially i only targeted one target with max escort but now i have a few more escort units so i hit 2 or 3 targets anytime they are bunched up. I have to use the rm to time my fighter sweeps a bit better, and i do send fs to enemy AF to catch them landing but my timing is still a work in progress. just an interesting note my 20th fighter group (p38js) is my best unit with a 7:1 k/d ratio-wish all my units were taht good this war would be over by x-mas ;)

(in reply to Golden Bear)

Post #: 27

RE: Questions from "green" players - 12/1/2009 10:02:49 AM

Frasse

Posts: 7
Joined: 11/16/2009
Status: offline

A new question regarding fighter sweeps.

Whats the difference for a fighter sweep flying along a path or flying towards a patrol point? Do the FS act different?

Frasse

(in reply to artuitus_slith)

Post #: 28

RE: Questions from "green" players - 12/1/2009 5:13:04 PM

Frasse

Posts: 7
Joined: 11/16/2009
Status: offline

Is there some way to avoid the escorts strafing rail yards and airfields. My squadrons get chewed up by the flak, I hate this, there are on an escort mission and are not supposed to be strafing. One should be able to avoid this, or else the game sucks.

(in reply to Frasse)

Post #: 29

RE: Questions from "green" players - 12/1/2009 8:06:57 PM

mikkey

Posts: 3142
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Slovakia
Status: offline

Currently no, it is necessary to plan a flight out of these places, if possible. It would be better if Harley or Hard Sarge add option "available strafing"/"no strafing" for fighter escort and fighter sweep (like the option for escorts "high escort" or "close escort").

_____________________________

(in reply to Frasse)

Post #: 30